The effective temperatures (\(T_{\rm eff}\) s) of the stars were determined by Lacy & Sabby [1]} based on the intrinsic \((b-y)_0\)  colour indices of the stars, which come from the combined colour indices, the light ratios in the \(b\)  and \(y\)  light curves from Clement et al. [2]}, and the intrinsic flux calibration by Popper [3]}. This approach is at first impression quite outdated, but can be checked using external information. First, we used the surface flux ratio in Table REF  to determine an approximate \(T_{\rm eff}\)  ratio of \(0.862 \pm 0.018\)  which gives \(T_{\rm eff,B}= 5138 \pm 107\)  K for a \(T_{\rm eff,A}\)  of 5960 K, in acceptable agreement with the \(T_{\rm eff,B}\)  from Lacy & Sabby [1]}. This point is only weak evidence because the variation in radiative parameters seen in the TESS light curves means our measurement of the surface brightness ratio may not be representative of its average value. Second, we determined the distance to the system using the method of Southworth et al. [5]} which relies on the surface brightness versus \(T_{\rm eff}\)  calibrations of Kervella et al. [6]}. The \(K\) -band measurement gives a distance of \(180.8 \pm 1.9\)  pc assuming an interstellar extinction of \(E(B\!-\!V)= 0.00 \pm 0.01\) ; a larger interstellar extinction can be ruled out by requiring the distances found in the \(BVJHK\)  bands to be consistent. The Gaia EDR3 parallax [7]} gives a distance of \(180.20 \pm 0.45\)  pc by simple inversion. Based on this, we accepted the \(T_{\rm eff}\)  values from Lacy & Sabby [1]} as reliable.
<TABLE>